I4 is bursting at the seams and he gives away free money to build a high speed rail connecting Orlando and Tampa and condemns central Florida commuters to bumper to bumper hell. Whats gonna happen when retired baby boomers and rich Chinese people flock to the area? We wont be ready.

I4 is bursting at the seams and he gives away free money to build a high speed rail connecting Orlando and Tampa and condemns central Florida commuters to bumper to bumper hell. Whats gonna happen when retired baby boomers and rich Chinese people flock to the area? We wont be ready.

Do you really believe the $2.4 billion the government is giving is all it will cost for a state already in deficit?

Sorry, we're in a tough global economy and the Middle East is ready to explode.

Bumper to bumper traffic is a trivial issue right now.

I know I-4 is bad, but Miami in general is worse and we're still breathing... but we're getting a new baseball stadium. YEAH!

Ya a new Baseball Stadium thats not fair! The private investors agreed to cover any over runs. They have also come out with plans for shorter stretches in Tampa and Orlando that would monitor any overruns. If the money runs out before they can be connected they just dont connect them. In any case Florida gets to use the money. It just hits me a little harder where I am in Winter Haven because they are building a Lego theme park here and it would really help to have a train connection to Orlando. It would also draw more affluent commuters and snow birds. It would really boost our local economy. Deficit Smecifit the people voted for it and they want it and hes taking it away.

Tri rail is not a speed rail. 15 minutes from Winter Haven to Downtown Orlando presents real utility. Im really tired of hearing the argument about old technology and transportation. Its apples and oranges.

Deficit Smecifit the people voted for it and they want it and hes taking it away.

The people also voted for him and he ran on a campaign of fiscal conservatism.

Giving away money isnt fiscally conservative. Hes making a statement based on politics not whats best for Florida. The rail would improve the communities of central florida. It would attract a more affluent population from outside the state. I dont expect conservatives to be forward thinking but they should be pro business

The early estimates is that a rail ticket will cost between 20-30 bucks. So for my family of 4 to go to Disney would cost 80 bucks? What a waste! Even if it cost 10 a ticket round trip, that's 40 bucks and then I have to drive to Tampa from Bradenton wait for the train, get on and stop in Lakeland, get to orlando and then Orlando to Disney. Then rent a car, taxi, or take a bus to Disney. Meanwhile, my car gets 30 miles to the gallon, so it still wouldn't be worth it. I was in Miami at the Bass Pro shops and there was a tri rail stop there. We figured let's take the train to Downtown Miami which was appx 5 miles away. For the 4 of us to go one way, the fare was appx 8-10 dollars. Screw that...Affluent peopel ride trains? Have you ever been on the Muni in San Fran? It's riddled with gang bangers and bums. The affluent live across the bay and drive into the city. Funny eh? I love opinions, they are like buttholes, everyone has one and most of them stink. IMO, NY has the best public transportation system in the country and you live in that city without a car. FACT: still, only 54% of the commuters take public transportation to and from work in NY. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporta ... _York_CityImagine a city with that density with 54% taking public transportation which also includes buses. Now imagine FLorida and the I-4 corridor....we don't have the density for everyday commuters. I like trains..I am from Philly and took them all the time. They can be rough though like in San Fran and Philly. Look at the Teco trolly in Tampa that goes from Channelside into YBOR. No one uses it. It is the perfect transportaion to go drinking, yet it's dead on the weekends. I would think a lightrail crossing Pinellas County would be better, but, oh yeah, they pulled up the tracks for a stupid bike trail. Talk about dumb....

But few actions have angered Florida pols in both parties more than Scott's February rejection of $2.4 billion in federal stimulus money for a $2.7 billion high-speed rail line between Tampa and Orlando. It would have been the first component in a proposed bullet-train system to alleviate traffic woes on Florida's long, car-clogged peninsula, not to mention a local incubator for the sorely needed high-tech enterprise. The GOP-led state legislature had spent the past two years laboring to win the federal funds, which the Obama Administration may now hand off to California. But Scott, who made clear his contempt for all things public sector during his campaign last year, called it a wasteful project that would end up putting "state taxpayers on the hook" despite the federal largesse. Two-thirds of Florida's 40 state senators rebuked him — most of them Republicans — including the senate majority leader.

Scott refused to budge, even when federal and Florida officials hammered out a revised plan of private-sector and local-government initiatives that guaranteed to keep the state off the hook. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood gave the governor until the end of Friday, March 4, to change his mind; if he doesn't, some GOP state legislators say they're mulling whether to sue him for "exceeding his executive authority."

I'm seeing a pattern when it comes to public transportation in Florida.

Nobody uses it.

And it doesn't pay for itself.

And I don't blame Scott for not buying into this "Florida won't be on the hook" argument. When it comes to these projects, it never pans out that way.

One of the reasons no one uses it is becuase it's actually more economical to use a car. Even in NY city the subway was $2.00 a ride per person. It took $4.00 for Michelle and I to get somwhere. Now there are commuter passes as well and the more you ride the cheaper it becomes. Sometimes, we just took a cab. Again, more convienant and sometimes cheaper. I do like trains, the energy used is home gown USA and not foreign oil. I like the idea of breeder reactors for electricity (which actually uses the waste that we have stored for energy and Bill Gates just opened a company to almost closing the loop on Nuclear energy using Thorium and Uranium, see France ractors as well), using Natural Gas for our heavy trucking and "melting " coal for synthetic oil, using biofuels from Cellunose, bring cars from the EU that get 50miles per gallon, and use public transportation where it makes sense. Maybe a commuter light rail network connecting Tampa's suburbs to downtown. Then again, jobs in this area are spread out. We have downtown, westshore, feathersound, ETC. I don't have the answers, but I do know that the line to Orlando is dumb.

Hes giving the money away. I could understand if the money went back to the people but it isnt. This is a different kind of Public transportation. Its a high speed rail not a regular rail. It would attract commuters working in Orlando and Tampa to the Polk County area. It would attract the massive amount of very soon baby boomer retirees looking for a warm place to winter. It would give Lego Land in Winter Haven a boost from Tourist who do the "state of Miami" Circuit. More people mean more services. This is not an opinion

Im not saying its a lock for success but it has great potential and is a new form of transportation that cannot be compared to existing forms. If this state is truly going to capitalize on its potential it must have efficient forms of mass transit or it will be an overcrowded and unattractive place to live or visit.

I just feel like in a country were the top 400 incomes last year equaled the bottom 100 million incomes that we could raise the tax rate on the super rich by 2 points and all of this would be avoided. There is no reason that the United States should ever not invest in new technology that would empower consumption and stimulate the economy. I would call our education, energy, transportation, and safety net programs immoral if their blatant inefficiencies didnt point to their obvious short sited, selfish, and stupid methods of execution. I am looking at the big picture and its an ugly.

Also, didn't we have a stimulus that was supposed to invest in infrastructure, create jobs etc?

How did that work out? More than half of it went to pet projects, our infrastructure is still a mess and our unemployment rate is still high.

The jobs that stimulus bill created cost 4 times more to create than what they pay the worker filling the job.

Sorry if I have little faith in the ability of the government to efficiently and effectively invest in anything.

I always loved the line "...created or saved X number of jobs." Covered their rears because they weren't creating jobs and in case they didn't they could say they "saved" jobs, which couldn't be proven.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't a majority of the stimulus bill/money, which they actually now call the recovery act because it didn't stimulate anything, not been spent?

I just feel like in a country were the top 400 incomes last year equaled the bottom 100 million incomes that we could raise the tax rate on the super rich by 2 points and all of this would be avoided. There is no reason that the United States should ever not invest in new technology that would empower consumption and stimulate the economy. I would call our education, energy, transportation, and safety net programs immoral if their blatant inefficiencies didnt point to their obvious short sited, selfish, and stupid methods of execution. I am looking at the big picture and its an ugly.

You will never see an increase. The GOP has decided to pander to the wealthy and only ask the middle class or the poor to "tighten it's belt." Now, they like to demonize middle class public servants and suck up to big business and banks.

You will never see an increase. The GOP has decided to pander to the wealthy and only ask the middle class or the poor to "tighten it's belt." Now, they like to demonize middle class public servants and suck up to big business and banks.

And the partisan blindness begins.

Yes, because Obama does not pander to any big businesses or banks. It's not like he is hand-picking who succeeds and who fails.

Interesting that all the companies getting a leg up in his economy are the ones that donated to his campaign.

Quote:

But which corporations are behaving admirably? Whom do we turn to in these dark times? Who can be bought to do the right thing?

"Right now, businesses across this country are proving that America can compete," Obama explained, listing a number of businesses that get it, such as Caterpillar, Whirlpool, Dow, and a company named Geomagic.

All of these phenomenal success stories (thanks to Ira Stoll at the blog "The Future of Capitalism" for pointing this out) also share, in one way or another, the privilege of feeding at gov'ment's welfare trough. Oh, yes, these exemplars of good corporate citizenry prove they can compete in a marketplace with taxpayer funds. Which will no doubt make them more compliant with the administration's wishes.

General Electric's CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, whom Obama recently appointed to lead his new panel on "job creation," understands this new reality. One of the nation's most effective cronies, Immelt's company has benefited from government bailouts, waivers, and lines of credit. A real icon of capitalism, Immelt.

One example of partnership in action is the $24.9 million in stimulus money GE received, primarily for “green technology” projects. This payout was only slightly more than the $23.4 million GE forked over last summer to settle charges brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission that the corporation had violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by paying kickbacks to Iraqi government agencies to win domestic infrastructure building contracts. Whether the White House will continue to oppose General Electric’s alternative engine for the Joint Strike Fighter - or will grant the corporate giant the same Obamacare waivers it has given many of its major labor-union supporters - remains to be seen.

Mr. Immelt’s coziness with the Obama team could be bad for business in the long run. His chummy relationship with Mr. Obama will bring heightened scrutiny from Congress to investigate whether the company is reaping unfair advantage. Despite Mr. Obama’s repeated claims of opposing corporate lobbying, GE has spent more than any other business to lobby the Obama White House. On Monday, FreedomWorks and the Free Enterprise Project launched a campaign to have Mr. Immelt replaced as GE CEO, calling him a “poster child of what’s wrong with business leaders today.”

Fast-forward to the present day. Lobbyists, reports the Center for Responsive Politics, had a record 2009 in Barack Obama's Washington. Despite candidate Obama's promises to shun them, they raked in $3,470,000,000. Somewhere up there, Tommy Corcoran is chuckling.

Last week, amid Washington's blizzards, Obama was asked about the $17 million bonus awarded to JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon and the $9 million bonus for Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein.

"I know both these guys; they are very savvy businessmen," he said. "I, like most of the American people, don't begrudge people success or wealth." So much for campaign-trail denunciations of "fat cat" bankers and bloated bonuses.

I never said Democrats are angels. You are putting words into my mouth.

Democrats are the worst run political party. They are spineless and unable to win arguments even when the public agrees with them. They don't ever really stand up for what they say they do. I wish there was a viable third (or fourth) party to turn to.

I never said Democrats are angels. You are putting words into my mouth.

Democrats are the worst run political party. They are spineless and unable to win arguments even when the public agrees with them. They don't ever really stand up for what they say they do. I wish there was a viable third (or fourth) party to turn to.

I stand by what I say about Republicans.

You only criticize Dems when you are called out for not criticizing Dems.

I just feel like in a country were the top 400 incomes last year equaled the bottom 100 million incomes that we could raise the tax rate on the super rich by 2 points and all of this would be avoided. There is no reason that the United States should ever not invest in new technology that would empower consumption and stimulate the economy. I would call our education, energy, transportation, and safety net programs immoral if their blatant inefficiencies didnt point to their obvious short sited, selfish, and stupid methods of execution. I am looking at the big picture and its an ugly.

How many cars will this train take off the road? How many train cars will the train have? Will it really make a dent on I4? Tri-rail has done nothing to take cars off the road or calm traffic down south and that thing is parallel to 95! In 10 yrs from now we will be saying the same thing about I4. Look the future of transportation is in rail, I do believe that, but it needs to go where it will work. High density urban centers...Chicago, San Fran, NY, Philly, Boston, ETC. The newer cities ATL, TMP, Houston, Dallas, ETC have jobs and housing spread out and they will con't to be car dependent, you/we can't change that now. Electric cars, bio-fuels (2nd-3rd gen), and nat gas will take up the slack in the future when oil gets too expensive.

I just feel like in a country were the top 400 incomes last year equaled the bottom 100 million incomes that we could raise the tax rate on the super rich by 2 points and all of this would be avoided. There is no reason that the United States should ever not invest in new technology that would empower consumption and stimulate the economy. I would call our education, energy, transportation, and safety net programs immoral if their blatant inefficiencies didnt point to their obvious short sited, selfish, and stupid methods of execution. I am looking at the big picture and its an ugly.

You will never see an increase. The GOP has decided to pander to the wealthy and only ask the middle class or the poor to "tighten it's belt." Now, they like to demonize middle class public servants and suck up to big business and banks.

Ya I agree hence the second to last sentence. But I don't think that means we should just say "screw progress" because of it.

But I would at least expect you to have some form of objectivity, despite your ideological views.

To focus on one party as being lackeys to corporations when the other party is as bad and in some cases worse is indicative of the depth of the points you make.

That's like criticizing porn stars of being sluts but leaving hookers unscathed because you have a personal preference for the prostitute profession over the porn star profession.

I don't view Dems as being as bad on this issue as the GOP. Simple as that. My analogy is that the GOP has a 0% on this. The Democrats have about a 40%. They both fail, but one is objectively worse. The GOP has zero interest in any policy that affects rich people or big time corporations. Zero. Democrats at least try once in a while. They at least campaign on some of these issues and there are some honest members of their caucus who back it up. But, this gets back to my point I made earlier about them being ineffective at governing. Case in point: extending the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy and not raising the estate tax. A real political party would have stood for it's beliefs and raised the taxes. But of course they managed to do what the GOP wanted in the end.

Almost 3/4 of those surveyed said to raise taxes people making over 250,000 a year.

If you woke up tomorrow with the headline, " _____________ lawmakers submit new legislation to increase taxes on people making over 250,000 a year" your mind is filling the blank with which political party?

Almost 3/4 of those surveyed said to raise taxes people making over 250,000 a year.

If you woke up tomorrow with the headline, " _____________ lawmakers submit new legislation to increase taxes on people making over 250,000 a year" your mind is filling the blank with which political party?

The wording of polls can change the results dramatically. I wonder how people would feel if the question was whether to raise taxes on people making $250,000 or more including small business, which is what the Democrats actually want to do.

Also, just because the people want it done doesn't make it the right thing to do.

Its amazing to me that people buy into the black and white perception that Republicans = rich, evil tycoon and Democrats = champion of the working class. There is so much gray area, and don't think for one second that a lot of Democrat motive for raising taxes is to increase spending to buy future votes. At the same time I'm sure Republicans do what they have to do concerning more votes from special interest. To say Republicans have zero interest is completely ignoring the fact that the Bush administration was completely reckless in its policies and entitlement spending on the poor and lower income portions of the working class.